Full-time college faculty of all stripes and in all types of institutions are highly satisfied with their chosen careers and with the work they do, according to the latest national survey of faculty attitudes. More than 90 percent say they are either very satisfied (40 percent) or satisfied (52 percent) with the work they do. And given the chance to choose anew, 87 percent would again pursue an academic career.

These are among the major findings of The American Faculty Poll, conducted by the National Opinion Research Center at the University of Chicago and sponsored by TIAA-CREF. The poll was based on interviews with a representative sample of 1,511 full-time college faculty whose duties include undergraduate teaching. The educators were questioned about their attitudes toward work, their employing institution's policies and priorities, tenure and the future of higher education.

The respondent pool mirrored the composition of a much larger full-time faculty database, the Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS). Demographically, respondents were 65 percent male, 86 percent white and fell into the following age groups: 17 percent under age 40; 30 percent ages 40 to 49; 34 percent ages 50 to 59; and 17 percent age 60 or above. In academic rank, 17 percent were lecturer/instructor/other; 22 percent were assistant professors; 26 percent were associate professors; and 35 percent were full professors. Eighty-one percent were tenured or on the tenure track.

It is worth noting that a large proportion of college teachers was not included in this survey--the 436,000 part-time faculty who account for 45 percent of the higher education teaching force.

Faculty who teach at two-year institutions are the most satisfied with their career choice of all the groups, 69 percent saying they would "definitely" pursue an academic career again, compared with 61 percent each at four-year public and private institutions.

Faculty were asked to rate the factors that most affected their work and satisfaction levels. A love of teaching was the primary consideration for faculty, the greatest percentage (86 percent ) of whom said that the opportunity to educate students was very important. Other factors high on their list included academic independence in the courses they taught (77 percent) and having time for family and personal needs (76 percent).

The number-one thorn in the side of respondents is students' lack of commitment to the work of learning and problems with their preparation, which interfered with the academic work of 50 percent of respondents. Other significant interferences for faculty were workload (47 percent) and lack of institutional support (41 percent).

When faculty rated what was very important to them in their work and careers, and how satisfied they were with these factors being met, a large gap appeared in many areas. For example, "having institutional support for scholarly inquiry" was very important to 62 percent, but only 12 percent were very satisfied with the level of support they are receiving. Similar gaps were apparent in the "time for family" factor (important to 76 percent, a satisfaction to 30 percent) and working in an intellectually challenging environment (70 percent to 27 percent). The salary and benefits package was very important to 52 percent, but very satisfying to only 13 percent. When asked about their teaching load, the ratings were 56 percent and 20 percent.

At a press conference releasing the report, AFT vice president Irwin Polishook, who chaired the panel of advisors working with TIAA-CREF and NORC, characterized the responses of faculty as revealing "ambivalence and ambiguity over what they're complaining about. We have to be concerned that faculty are complaining about the quality of their students at the same time that they say they like to spend their lives teaching them." AFT vice president William Scheuerman was also a member of the panel.

One somewhat surprising finding to the panel of advisors working with TIAA-CREF and NORC, is the level of support among faculty for the policies and priorities of their institutions. On 15 of 16 factors, more than half of the faculty polled say their institution's emphasis is "about right." "This belies the conventional wisdom," notes Richard Chait, a panel member who is a professor of education at Harvard University. Areas where faculty do express misgivings about institutional priorities, however, include the emphasis on increasing student enrollment and on enhancing the institution's competitive standing.

Another interesting finding touches on the issue of tenure. Faculty who work at institutions where tenure has been under assault in the last two years, overwhelmingly (97 percent) support its retention. Only 5.6 percent believe that post-tenure review "has impacted faculty performance." Commenting that it was "awfully hard to read" that statistic, Chait, an outspoken advocate for tenure reform, says that skeptics might be correct that post-tenure review is not the way to improve faculty performance.

Free copies of the survey are available from Dr. Voon Chin Phua, TIAA-CREF, 730 Third Avenue, New York, NY 10017-3206.

A new protected species is emerging in U.S. society: It's the wealthy white male, who in increasing numbers is seeking special accommodations for taking the Scholastic Assessment Test. In recent years, the Los Angeles Times reports, there's been a surge in requests for special accommodations from people taking the Scholastic Assessment Test (SAT). Historically, the majority of those requests have come from people with bona fide physical or learning disabilities, says the College Board, which administers the test. But lately, the number of students who have secured the right to get extra time to complete the test has doubled. The increase is traced to students who live in affluent communities within the Boston-New York-Washington, D.C., corridor and in wealthy areas of California.

The College Board is troubled, says its president, Gaston Caperton. "We are concerned about people taking advantage of [the extra time allowance] who are not really qualified to, but have been smart enough to step around the rules," he told the Times. "And, secondly, that people who are not as [economically] advantaged have equal access to accommodations."

To get a special accommodation on the SAT or other high-stakes test, such as the LSAT, GRE, or MCAT, typically requires a psychologist's or medical doctor's recommendation and the high school's subsequent approval. Last year, 1.9 percent of SAT-takers got such an accommodation. However, College Board data show that the percentage jumped fivefold for students at New England prep schools, where in some cases, one in 10 students got extra time to take the exam. Students who get the special accommodations are twice as likely as others to come from families earning more than $100,000 a year, where both parents have a college degree. And, where 45 percent of all test-takers are male, 61 percent of those receiving special accommodations are. In contrast, at 10 Los Angeles inner-city high schools, no students sought the accommodation. Learning disabilities are more frequently found in economically disadvantaged populations, notes the College Board.

Research shows that extra time can significantly boost a student's performance on the SAT, by as many as 100 points. More than 20 percent of those who take the test without accommodations don't complete it.